[lukey_boii asks:]
When reading Aristotle should I learn to read the original ancient greek? I feel like I won't understand the nuances without understanding the original context of the language first.
—————
[And I reply:]
Wouldn't you need to read Aristotle in English, first, to form an opinion as to whether or not his books would justify many years of hard labor to re-translate and investigate?
Re: "I feel like I won't understand the nuances without understanding the original context of the language first." What if you're wrong? What if years of language study only reveals that you're an idiot and you won't understand it either way? What if the study of foreign languages leads to more self-deception, revealing more about the intention of the reader and less about the intention of the author of the text? The vast majority of people who learn a foreign language to read Buddhist scripture only become more blind to what those texts say thereby: they're able to understand LESS in their second language than their first, they're LESS able to cross-examine the evidence in an exotic, ancient language than a familiar, modern one. Likewise, Communists continue to be deceived by the same (simple, dishonest and stupid) texts as they move from one language to the next: the translator is not "undeceived" by the powers of translation.
It's one thing to make a judgement about Aristotle being worth reading, and it's another thing to make a judgement about yourself, as a reader. It may be that nothing good results from your learning of Ancient Greek at all.
